Jump to content

Some things I didn't know about the atmosphere and climate


iowaboy1965

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, JamesW said:

The graph produced by NASA is quite correct... have a look at the scales, thousand of years vs hundreds of millions.... and you have missed the point. CO2 has never been higher for the period humans have been around. Ya know, climate that is compatible for us to live... Thats what the graph is trying to show with different scales, which can not be 'seen' on the larger scale. The second point is the dramatic change since the industrial revolution. Again look at the scales for the rate of change, ~200 years since the industrial revolution vs the millions of years of previous changes. The rate of change is unprecedented.

image.png.74f4a59cfa69ac8196abb3e714186f33.png

Answer me this, have global CO2 levels ever been higher than today????

What was the plant and animal life like if CO2 levels were higher than today. How did those levels get to there?

Science and facts prove that today's levels are nothing to worry about

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's say that they're not only correct, but it's much worse than they think....

Global average temperatures are going to go up by say 10 degrees..... Why is this bad?

For the most part, the highest density population areas of the world are currently within a +/-30° arc of the equator despite the fact that far more landmass exists north and south of that region. These are all areas that many of us can't imagine living due to being so hot, but those who live there do not object. From what we can deduce, the warmer equator is where early man developed and began to flourish. 

A 10° change would probably exponentially expand the land available for agriculture and plant life in general. Look at the empty space of Siberia and Canada. Imagine how productive it could be if just a little warmer.

When it boils down, mother nature is probably adapting to support the life that is currently flourishing on earth.

It doesn't matter if you believe in evolutionary or intelligent design theory, a constant we can agree on is change.

God/Nature/Fates allowed us to discover and use Earth's natural resources to our benefit for a yet unknown reason that will some day protect or preserve all life on Earth. Or possibly reach out and give life to a place that has yet to develop it. Everything we know of life here could be the result of an alternate "mankind" (as we know it) that reached out and planting their seeds eons ago.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This stuff has been going on and in flux since "In the beginning God created the heaven's and the earth" The difference is in the ability now to detect it and that of coarse is subject to who interprets it and what agenda they have. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Drysleeves said:

As the old saying goes, you can't make this stuff up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Finney said:

We have been lied to for so long by people pushing their agendas I believe none of them.

The only fact coming out of Washington is they are spending our money like drunken sailors.

No disrespect to the sailors.

They will not stop until WE reign them in.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, sd186man said:

I haven’t heard how may years of tier 4 or 5 diesel and gas engine emissions and EV vehicle benefits the Canadian forest fires are offsetting, thinking humanity controls the planet is absurd to me

The news media started spewing just that the last week or so. Star tribune here in MN had front page above the fold stating "decades of work has been erased by canadian fires.

Here's a story from NYT, star tribune wants you to pay to read. Both are liberal rags.....

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/20/climate/wildfire-smoke-air-pollution.html

My question is if we've made huge gains in air quality in the last 40 years, why am I told we're worse off today??? 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A thought I had this morning.  Catalytic converters and unleaded gas were supposed to save the planet when i was in grade school (early to mid 70s) 

Now carbon dioxide is killing the world. But it was supposed to be so much better and harmless in the 70s compared to carbon monoxide. So does this mean we might as well stop using catalytic converters because according to "the experts," it's as bad or worse than carbon monoxide? 🤔 🤷‍♂️ what's the truth here.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, iowaboy1965 said:

A thought I had this morning.  Catalytic converters and unleaded gas were supposed to save the planet when in was in grade school (early to mid 70s) 

Now carbon dioxide is killing the world. But it was supposed to be so much better and harmless in the 70s compared to carbon monoxide. So does this mean we might as well stop using catalytic converters because according to "the experts," it's as bad or worse than carbon monoxide? 🤔 🤷‍♂️ what's the truth here.

currently truth is whatever someone thinks it is based on a combination of their upbringing, friends, parental opinions, a quick phone search to google and wikipedia, and their own philosophy thrown in because of the right they have to make up and to believe whatever they want regardless of its integrity

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, iowaboy1965 said:

A thought I had this morning.  Catalytic converters and unleaded gas were supposed to save the planet when in was in grade school (early to mid 70s) 

Now carbon dioxide is killing the world. But it was supposed to be so much better and harmless in the 70s compared to carbon monoxide. So does this mean we might as well stop using catalytic converters because according to "the experts," it's as bad or worse than carbon monoxide? 🤔 🤷‍♂️ what's the truth here.

Man you want to get a tree hugger twisted up, explain to them that catalytic converters are directly responsible for the modern day increase in atmospheric CO2 levels!!! Their Heads explode.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that the UN convinced countries to sign a treaty for sustainability and focus on the environment in 1992 with agenda 21 when scientists were just getting out of the gate on any studies should say something. There was a dramatic shift in priorities with that agreement and the state of lunacy where we are at today, well into their 2030 great reset currently, the name UN sounds fuzzy and nice, their goals and direction are not.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, iowaboy1965 said:

A thought I had this morning.  Catalytic converters and unleaded gas were supposed to save the planet when in was in grade school (early to mid 70s) 

Now carbon dioxide is killing the world. But it was supposed to be so much better and harmless in the 70s compared to carbon monoxide. So does this mean we might as well stop using catalytic converters because according to "the experts," it's as bad or worse than carbon monoxide? 🤔 🤷‍♂️ what's the truth here.

Carbon monoxide is produced by incomplete combustion of carbon fuels. It is a poisonous gas. CO takes the place of O2 in your blood. Naturally CO is a very small part of the atmosphere, measured in parts per billion. CO in the atmosphere will attach to O in the air and form CO2. This process usually occurs in a few weeks or months. So the CO will become CO2 on its own but not before being a dangerous  gas.  So are catalytic converters helpful?  Yes, they reduce pollutants especially in urban or industrial areas where CO levels could be measured in PPM rather than PPB. 
 

Did the Canadian fires this summer effect the weather?  The amount of particulates in the air definitely darkened the skies across large portions of the US and made for some cooler temperatures off and on throughout the summer. 

If people want to know the truth you need to do your own research. That’s not watching videos on social media or finding “news” sources that align with what you think is true. Learn the basics of chemistry and physics. Do your own math from the information you can find from different sources, both those you agree and  disagree with. They may be the same information just presented differently. They may be wildly different. 
 

Is the world ending in ten years? Probably not. And if it is there’s nothing we’re going to do to stop it. 
Are there people out there wanting to take advantage of the world we live in?  Sure, there always have been people like that throughout history. 

This thread has comments from Creationists who believe the earth is 5,000 years old and those referencing scientific data from billions of years ago. There are those who say to not trust anything from a gov scientist. Well, that’s pretty much all of them. And throws out all of the scientific theories. It’s been interesting to read. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MTB98 said:

Carbon monoxide is produced by incomplete combustion of carbon fuels. It is a poisonous gas. CO takes the place of O2 in your blood. Naturally CO is a very small part of the atmosphere, measured in parts per billion. CO in the atmosphere will attach to O in the air and form CO2. This process usually occurs in a few weeks or months. So the CO will become CO2 on its own but not before being a dangerous  gas.  So are catalytic converters helpful?  Yes, they reduce pollutants especially in urban or industrial areas where CO levels could be measured in PPM rather than PPB. 
 

Did the Canadian fires this summer effect the weather?  The amount of particulates in the air definitely darkened the skies across large portions of the US and made for some cooler temperatures off and on throughout the summer. 

If people want to know the truth you need to do your own research. That’s not watching videos on social media or finding “news” sources that align with what you think is true. Learn the basics of chemistry and physics. Do your own math from the information you can find from different sources, both those you agree and  disagree with. They may be the same information just presented differently. They may be wildly different. 
 

Is the world ending in ten years? Probably not. And if it is there’s nothing we’re going to do to stop it. 
Are there people out there wanting to take advantage of the world we live in?  Sure, there always have been people like that throughout history. 

This thread has comments from Creationists who believe the earth is 5,000 years old and those referencing scientific data from billions of years ago. There are those who say to not trust anything from a gov scientist. Well, that’s pretty much all of them. And throws out all of the scientific theories. It’s been interesting to read. 

So..... is current atmospheric CO2 levels something to be concerned about????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...